Sex Offender Assessment uk

The essay an in depth sexual offender’s typology conducted by using Groth’s typology of sex offenders and rapist. To assess the offender in the selected case, I use the SOMB Checklist based upon the SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet and his psychosexual evaluation. Historically, it was back in 1990s that U.S experienced the rise in sexual harassment since the number of reported cases increased by almost 7% yearly from then. This necessitated formulation of laws to curb the menace Cowburn, M. (2005). However, it is well understood that authorities cannot employ the one-approach suits all thus necessitating the development of offenders’ categorization.

A case of sexual assault used for the paper is the case of Mr. Smith who was 58 when convicted of his first offense.

Mr smith was involved in child sexual molestation and he had preplanned it through communication he had with the lady through electronic devices. These are clear indication that he had really planned for the act. The degree of violence noted was child molestation and sexual assault.

Sexual Offender Profile

The offender at the age of 18 engaged into sexual contact six times with individuals less than 15 years. (Data Source: Self-report during Sex Offense Mental Health Evaluation, police report, official records)

The offender has an history of solicitation or via electronic devices(Data Source: Self-report obtained during Sex Offense Mental Health Evaluation, police report, official records)

The offender was 58 years when first convicted of sexual assault. (Data Source: Self-report obtained during Sex Offense Mental Health Evaluation, police report, official records)

The offender engaged into sexual contacts with a female friend 13 years old. He had no sexual contact with relatives. (Data Source: Official report, Self-report obtained during Sex Offense Mental ealth Evaluation,)

The offender did not engage in forced sexual contact or with individuals who were sleeping, incapacitated or helpless individuals. (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in sexual contact with anyone 4 or more years younger than him ((Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in sexual contact with anyone age 15 or 16 after he turned 25. (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in sexual contact with anyone under age 18 with whom he might had any type of position of trust. (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in sexual contact with anyone through coercion.(Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender have not engaged in frottage or opportunistic sexual rubbing, bumbling or touching against strangers or unsuspecting person (SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in voyeurism or sexual peeping (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in exhibitionism or indecent exposure (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in prostitution (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in public masturbation (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in using or stealing of underwear, undergarment or personal property for masturbation or sexual arousal (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in stalking behaviors (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in child pornography (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in sexual contact with animals (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History DDisclosure Packet)

The offender did not engage in institutional sexual contact (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender has no history of obscene phone calls contact (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender has no record of previous arson or fire setting behaviors (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender has no records on domestic violence (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

Instant crime

The offender engaged into sexual contact with friend 13 years old (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did had sexual contact in car, park and house (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The victim is said to have volunteered (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not use physical force nor threats by weapons, gestures or statements (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

The offender did not cause the victim any physical pain (Data Source: SOMB Sexual History Disclosure Packet)

Offender’s typology

Limited time Offer

0

0

Weeks

0

0

days

:

0

0

hours

:

0

0

minutes

:

0

0

seconds

Get 19% OFF

According to the typology developed by Groth, Stephanie’s offender is categorized as being fixated offender. The individual is characterized by having never developed an attraction to age-appropriate partners and have a persistent continual and compulsive attraction to children. Such manners depict themselves during adolescence. Similarly the offense committed by Smith was premeditated and do not arise from stress Knight, P. (1990). . Additionally, engaging in sexual contact with members out of family linage warrants him to be in this typology. It is also characterized by recruiting vulnerable children and engaging in grooming to enhance continuous abuse as Smith did the same fortnightly and six times.